Could the killer have been ambidextrous?

[Crystal]

Well there you are then, Mr. Hyde. Hutchinson was ambitdextrous - simple.

[perrymason]

A study of handedness by gender was done in the UK in 1992 and published in this release,.. (The Graphologist 1992 (Winter), 10(4) Issue 37, 176-182).

Using a sample of 8435 people, the following results were published...

Table 1 OVERALL HANDEDNESS 1992

Sample Size: 8435 people, (Male 4069, Female 4366)

Left-Total: 10% (Male 11%, Female 9%)
Right-Total: 89% (Male 88%, Female 90%)
Both-Total: 1% (Male 1%, Female 1%)

Using those figures and assuming an even lower percentage of the population was either Left Handed or Ambidextrous in 1888.... as children were taught to write Right Handed then, you can see that its less than a 10 % chance we would have a Left Handed Killer by population, and around 1% chance that we would have one equally adept with both hands.

I would say based on that, for myself, its highly improbable and most unlikely that the killer was Ambidextrous.

Best regards all.

[Jane Coram]

Hi,

Just going back to the point about the way the victims throats were cut......

The wounds almost all started under the left ear and finished on the right side of the neck, (with the possible exception of one of the cuts on Polly Nichols' throat) and blood spray and leakage from the throat wounds strongly indicate that they must have been lying on or close to the ground and probably leaning slightly to the left, when the throat was cut.

That being the case there is also little doubt that Jack favoured using his right hand above his left and probably considerably so. The fact that in some cases he cut the throat not once, but twice, and that the cuts were so savage that they nicked the vertebrae at the back and all but severed the head, would seem to show that he used his right hand with great strength and confidence and it was his favoured hand.

As I said before, the only way we might be able to get a more accurate picture of whether or not Jack was ambidexterous to a greater or lesser degree is to examine the victims wounds individually to try and assess which hand might have been used on each - although it would only be best guess, even then.

One problem is that some of the statements made by the examining doctors could be in error, (and almost certainly are) misleading, or only partly correct, which means we also have to sift through them very critically to see which of their opinions should be taken at face value and which used with a pinch of salt.

For instance - Llewellyn suggests that the wounds running downwards on Polly's right hand side might have been done by a left handed person, and seems fairly confident that Polly Nichol's throat had probably been inflicted by the left hand as well.

The problem is that his testimony is not that solid in other areas, so has to be used with caution. He said he thought that Polly's body could have been dumped at the murder site and she had been murdered elsewhere, which of course we know is not correct. He also said,

'The Deceased's clothes were loose, and the wounds could have been inflicted while she was dressed.' So full marks there for accuracy. Daily News September 1st

The best we can do really is compare the inquest statements with official records and the descriptions and contemporary diagrams of the wounds themselves and make up our own minds as to what hand or hands Jack used and why.

I do have diagrams of all the victims wounds, (contemporary and modern) including throat wounds if anyone would like them. I'm not sure that this is the appropriate thread to post them on, unless people want to look at the wounds with a view to assessing which hand might have been used to effect them, but I can always email them to anyone who wants them, if you send me a pm.

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

[Jane Coram]

Good post Michael, I always like to know the odds when placing a bet!

xxxxxx

[perrymason]

Good post Michael, I always like to know the odds when placing a bet!

xxxxxx

Thanks Janie....its not de-facto anything, but it does allow you to hedge your bet a bit.

I think the only evidence that really matters in this regard is the direction of the throat cuts... as you point out.

Cheers Jane,....always nice to speak with you.

[smezenen]

I agree Michael the throat cuts are the key. besides direction i think they also tell us there is a good chance the blade he used is curved and not straight.
A straigth blade drawn over the skin will produced a cut with near even depth along the length of the cut. A curved blade will sink in as the cut is extended as more of the blades surface comes into contact with the skin.

[perrymason]

I agree Michael the throat cuts are the key. besides direction i think they also tell us there is a good chance the blade he used is curved and not straight.
A straigth blade drawn over the skin will produced a cut with near even depth along the length of the cut. A curved blade will sink in as the cut is extended as more of the blades surface comes into contact with the skin.

Hi smezenen,

That very thinking in bold led some detectives to surmise that the knife may have been a Middle East style blade. In fact some were found discarded during that period, in some bushes.

The problem for me with that is to use that kind of knife to slit, and slice, and maneuver within the confines of the aperture its inserted into, makes a curved blade for excising organs more awkward. Unless the blade is sharpened on both sides the blade, making it sort of like a Bowie knife, with the tip being curved and sharpened both top and bottom. That kind of knife can cut downward, or upward, without changing the position of the blade or the hand.

Best regards smezenen.

[smezenen]

Hi smezenen,

That very thinking in bold led some detectives to surmise that the knife may have been a Middle East style blade. In fact some were found discarded during that period, in some bushes.

The problem for me with that is to use that kind of knife to slit, and slice, and maneuver within the confines of the aperture its inserted into, makes a curved blade for excising organs more awkward. Unless the blade is sharpened on both sides the blade, making it sort of like a Bowie knife, with the tip being curved and sharpened both top and bottom. That kind of knife can cut downward, or upward, without changing the position of the blade or the hand.

Best regards smezenen.

A shorter blade, say 6 inchs or so and maybe shaped more like a filet knife would accomodate organ removal. It may also be likly he used more than one knife. I dont think he would carry to many knifes but 2 certinaly wouldnt be out of the question. also and im not sure about this but in some of the descriptions wasnt there a bag or package of some kind. Possibly more tools.

[perrymason]

A shorter blade, say 6 inchs or so and maybe shaped more like a filet knife would accomodate organ removal. It may also be likly he used more than one knife. I dont think he would carry to many knifes but 2 certinaly wouldnt be out of the question. also and im not sure about this but in some of the descriptions wasnt there a bag or package of some kind. Possibly more tools.

Sure, thats possible...in fact if only one man killed Martha Tabram, there is a good chance he had two blades on him. But add changing knives into the small amount of time he had with Kate ...and it might not make sense.

Cheers mate.

[smezenen]

Sure, thats possible...in fact if only one man killed Martha Tabram, there is a good chance he had two blades on him. But add changing knives into the small amount of time he had with Kate ...and it might not make sense.

Cheers mate.

yes only about 10 minutes but if we go along with this thread and he had one in each hand then not out of the realm of possibility. even if he wasnt ambidextrous.

[caz]

A study of handedness by gender was done in the UK in 1992 and published in this release,.. (The Graphologist 1992 (Winter), 10(4) Issue 37, 176-182).

Using a sample of 8435 people, the following results were published...

Table 1 OVERALL HANDEDNESS 1992

Sample Size: 8435 people, (Male 4069, Female 4366)

Left-Total: 10% (Male 11%, Female 9%)
Right-Total: 89% (Male 88%, Female 90%)
Both-Total: 1% (Male 1%, Female 1%)

Using those figures and assuming an even lower percentage of the population was either Left Handed or Ambidextrous in 1888.... as children were taught to write Right Handed then, you can see that its less than a 10 % chance we would have a Left Handed Killer by population, and around 1% chance that we would have one equally adept with both hands.

I would say based on that, for myself, its highly improbable and most unlikely that the killer was Ambidextrous.

Best regards all.

Hi Perry,

I don't really doubt your conclusion, but that's because Jack was only human, and purely on a statistical basis was more likely to have had, say, a common blood group than a rare one.

But if all the naturally left handed in the LVP had been taught (even forced) to write with their right as children, would that not have made the 'equally adept with both hands' percentage artificially higher in 1888, if anything, than the 1% you quote above?

A study of Jack the Ripperishness by gender was done in the UK in 2009 by Caz and published in this release: The Chronic Speculator, Issue 101.

Using a sample of 8435 people, the following results were published:

Table 1 OVERALL JACK THE RIPPERISHNESS 2009

Sample Size: 8435 people, (Male 4069, Female 4366)

Jack the Ripperish Total: 0% (Male 0%, Female 0%)
Non-Jack the Ripperish Total: 100% (Male 100%, Female 100%)

I would say based on that, it’s highly improbable and most unlikely that Jack the Ripper ever existed, and therefore had no hands to be ambidextrous with.

The moral of the story is that a survey of 8435 Victorian serial mutilators might or might not have produced significantly different percentages regarding left, right or ambidextrous. Obviously in this instance we can all make the reasonably informed guess that it would make next to no difference who was used for the survey, as long as they had two fully working hands apiece. But reasonably informed guesses like this can't always be made, and we may not always have a clue when they can and when they can't.

Back in the dark ages, they could have sincerely believed (as Crystal touched on) that all criminals were more likely to be 'sinister', in more ways than one, and that Jack of all people, taking on the devil's own work, had to be master of both hands to do it. And only a survey of equal numbers of saints and sinners, showing the same number of south paws (and both paws) on either side, and endorsed by the Pope, might have been enough to shake that belief.

Love,

Caz
X

[perrymason]

Hi Caz,

They werent stats I compiled... it was from data available to everyone, and they concerned people, not serial killers.

Its no secret that by overwhelming numbers Right handed people in any general population would be the majority, no secret then that a far lesser number would be Left handed, and a number much smaller than that would be people who are Ambidexterous....meaning they can and do use both hands equally in day to day life, not that they can also write Left Handed.

The numbers didnt surprise me at all, and thats why I felt comfortable suggesting that its highly unlikely that Jack was Ambidextrous,....supported by the miniscule amount of people within a surveyed general population that were.

If you want to use the direction of the throat cuts as a means to identify what if any hand Jack preferred...it would be best to know that murders he didnt do werent included in the sampling. Something we cannot be assured of with the Canonical Group or any other proposed variation on a theme. We can say that it does appear that within the Canonical Group, there is evidence that suggests a left handed killer for one of the murders at least.

Best regards Caz.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

The Ripper was a right-handed man.

That being said, I'm ambidextrous, and one thing that's always confused me is that he cut their throats from left to right, which would mean that if he was right-handed, then he'd have to have cut their throats towards him, with a striking inward motion. But I'd have thought it would've been a lot easier and more comfortable to have cut their throats from left to right with an outward motion, striking away from himself, and if that was the case then their throats would've been cut from right to left. Or is it just me?

[DVV]

I play tennis with my left-hand, while I'm right-handed at pétanque.
Football: left leg.
When I played rugby, my best pass was to the right (left-handed). i kicked "up-and-under" with my left leg. Had I used my right foot, it would have been a "not-too-much-up-and-behind".
I hold my cigarette in my left hand, and my glass in my right.
Terrible.

Amitiés,
David

[iris84]

The Ripper was a right-handed man.

That being said, I'm ambidextrous, and one thing that's always confused me is that he cut their throats from left to right, which would mean that if he was right-handed, then he'd have to have cut their throats towards him, with a striking inward motion. But I'd have thought it would've been a lot easier and more comfortable to have cut their throats from left to right with an outward motion, striking away from himself, and if that was the case then their throats would've been cut from right to left. Or is it just me?

I think this depends a lot on how he was holding the knife. I can't remember who posted the pictures with the exam
ples, but it's worth checking the thread. It's definitely in here.